inheritancefandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:Shadowthief2
Welcome, newcomer! Hello, and welcome to the Inheritance Cycle Wiki (Inheriwiki for short.) Thank you for ' '! If you have not already done so, please consider [http://inheritance.wikia.com/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&type=signup creating an account] (see ) - this helps us credit you for your work! As part of the Inheritance wiki community, you are welcome and encouraged to be bold! You can edit and improve nearly every page in the wiki. For your convenience, here are some useful links to help you get started: *'Community Portal' - the place for you to see what needs to be done, ask questions, and request articles. *'Help' - the place for you to get in touch with both the wiki- and Inheriwiki-styles. Learn how to edit a page, use templates, and more. *'Forum' - the place where you can request for help or discuss things about Inheriwiki. *'Basic templates' - a list of the most common Inheriwiki templates. *'Sandbox' - the place to test edits before publicizing them elsewhere. *'Inheriwiki chat (#Inheriwiki)' - a great place to go for real-time conversations with other Inheriwikians, great if you have vandal issues, or need to ask a question, and get an answer fast. Creating a userpage for yourself is generally a good idea. You can find your userpage ' '. On your userpage, you can write a short bio of yourself, list some of your interests, etc. Your ' ' is the place where other users can contact you. If you have any questions, be sure to address them on the Help desk. Please sign your comments like this: ~~~~. Doing so will stamp your comment with your username and the date. Enjoy your stay! Congratulations on becoming an Inheriwikian. -- Weas-El (Talk) 22:46, September 7, 2010 Contribution moved Hi Timmycutts, your contribution on Talk:Book 4 was moved to our forum, that's where discussions about theories can be carried out. And please sign your contribution on talk and forum pages with four tildes (~~~~), thank you. --Weas-El (talk) 15:06, September 9, 2010 (UTC) :Hi Timmycutts, :let me answer that by posing and answering these questions: :#What do we really know about the "Unknown Rider", and what is speculation? :#Is the talk page or the forum the better place for your comment? :#If the answer is "the forum", where exactly do we put it? :The first question is easy to answer. We don't know, who the next Rider will be, or whether he will be sypathetic to the Varden's cause or the Empire. He or she could even say "leave me alone" and fly away. Paolini said nothing about that in any interview, as far as I know. If he did, please give us a hyperlink, so we can read it with our own eyes. Even if all fans would agree with you, this would still be speculation, no fact. To question the simple fact, that we don't know any more details about this, is quite odd in my opinion. :To tell the truth, I didn't realize, that you wrote your comment in response to that sentence. It would have been helpful to mention that in your comment. But actually that changes nothing. Speculation is speculation, and fact is fact. Speculation doesn't belong into articles (or their talk pages), but into our forum. If we start adding speculation to talk pages (while referencing sentences from the article), others will add their own speculations, and the talk pages will become a complete mess (as it was some time ago). I think this answers the second question. :The third one is a bit difficult. The Forum "Unknown Dragon Rider Candidates" was named "Unknown Dragon Rider" some time ago. The name was changed when we merged two forum pages. Since this is our main forum page about that topic, we should maybe rename it back to the more general term "Unknown Dragon Rider". (There are actually more forum pages about that topic, but they are much shorter.) :Since the name is disputable, it may have been wrong to move your comment there. Maybe it would have been more appropriate to create a new forum page for it. I didn't really think about that "candidates" problem, sorry about that. Feel free to move your comment to another forum page, or create a new one. :I hope I could make my position clear. If you still disagree, we should maybe obtain a third person's opinion. :--Weas-El (talk) 08:12, September 10, 2010 (UTC) ::Oh come on, you can't be serious, writing a book isn't deterministic... The fate of the green dragon wasn't decided on, when Paolini chose his color. And reading books would be quite boring, if authors would be bound to stereotypes, like red/black=bad and blue/green=good. ::What you're talking about may be a deductive theory, but it's not a fact. Please check Wikipedia about the definition of the word "fact": The word fact can refer to '''verified information' about past or present circumstances or events which are presented as objective reality.'' ::What we need is proof, but similiar choice of colors in other books/movies is not more than a presumptive evidence. ::--Weas-El (talk) 09:53, September 10, 2010 (UTC) :::I totally agree with you and the author of that page (M. Macauley probably?) in this point. If the green dragon and his Rider would support the Empire, it would definitely be a huge advantage. And I agree too, that the green dragon will probably join the "good side", since Saphira needs a mate, and I don't think that Thorn is a candidate for this. :::But you draw a comparison to Star Wars before, now I do the same: Do you remember the finale of the "old trilogy"? The Republic was nearly shattered and about to lose the war, Luke Skywalker was captured by the Emperor... But it needed only one man, Darth Vader, to change his mind to turn the tide, kill the Emperor and destroy the Empire. Bad chances don't make victory impossible. (My theory: Eragon gets caught, Murtagh rescues him, both fight Galbatorix together and kill him, but Murtagh and Thorn get killed too. The green dragon will hatch for Arya, but later, or maybe before, but in this case he will be to young to support the Varden.) :::But back to topic, I don't want to discuss what will possibly happen in Book 4 here. What I want to say is, that even though what you say may be probable, we have no proof. And I think it's really important to give our readers facts only, so they can decide for themselves what to believe. :::--Weas-El (talk) 12:26, September 10, 2010 (UTC) ::::I would just like to add that Weas-El is right; you have no hard evidence, a.k.a. proof, that the green dragon will be good. You say things about balance, but you forget that 13 (14 if you count Galbatorix) riders took on, and killed, almost all of the other riders. Not to mention that Brom took out many of those 13 later, pretty much by himself. Those two things don't fit well with your symmetry and equality theory. As Weas-El said, if you have a link somewhere, of Paolini saying that the Green dragon would fight for the Varden, we'd gladly accept what you have said. As it stands, there is no such link, and no proof, therefore it is speculation, and belongs in the forum, where Weas-El moved it to. ''Fallen62 - Talk | '' 19:14, September 10, 2010 (UTC) :::::I even agreed with your theory, what more do you expect? You talk about logic, but obviously you don't know or understand the basics of logical reasoning. Sorry, but your last comment is ridiculous. Please read again what I wrote above. Maybe the problem isn't about the content of book 4, but about handling criticism... And you call me arrogant... :::::You're right, we should finish this argument, since it seems to lead nowhere. Have a good weekend, --Weas-El (talk) 01:10, September 11, 2010 (UTC) I know I'm a little late to the reply party, but you're also being extremely arrogant yourself by saying that you're right, and right a vast amount, and that we're idiots for not listening to you. Like Weas said, we don't deny you could be correct, but for now it's speculation, and there's no other way to look at it. Until we have some hard facts from either CP or the book itself, that's all your thoughts are. I know that you're 16 and you feel like you have a "better insight" into CP's mind because of when he started thinking of and writing the books, but the only person who knows what's going to happen is CP himself. Until we get information stating otherwise from him, pretty much everything about Book 4 is speculation. You can argue it any way you want, it's all complete and total speculation; there is literally no other way to put it. I know what it's like to be 16 and feel like you're on top of the world and always right, and if you are actually 95% right, good for you. However, I doubt that's the case, and I have my own perceptions and experience to base that on. By the way, did you know that 88.59% of all statistics are made up on the spot? Pretty cool, huh? So, even though the forum is "such a degrading place for someone who's right 95% of the time (the other 5% striving to correct)," that's where your speculation will stay until we get some hard evidence one way or another. Sorry to open up a can of worms, but I wanted to explain a bit further why I think what I think and why I back up Weas-El 100%. And sorry for the late response, life caught up to me a bit. ''Fallen62 - Talk | '' 14:09, September 17, 2010 (UTC) :You're right, I don't know what it's like to have Asperger's, but I do know several people who have it. And you don't accept that I called you arrogant, fine, whatever. I don't like that you called Weas-El and I ignorant; we are two people far from it. I also have a higher than average IQ, and have an aversion to being wrong, but I admit when I am, and when I am speculating. Your thoughts made perfect, logical sense to you, which is fine. They're logical to me, too. However, they are still speculations. I'm not saying your wrong, but I'm not saying your right. It's speculation; it may be right in your mind, but we have no proof of that. And I don't take kindly to threats, so please don't do it again. Your comment was moved because it is speculation, plain and simple. Speculation doesn't mean your wrong, but it doesn't mean your right. I've never said you were wrong, and I even agree that it makes sense, but until we have word from CP, or proof in the form of Book 4, it's speculative, and it doesn't belong in an article. ''Fallen62 - Talk | '' 02:38, September 19, 2010 (UTC) Re: Fresh Start Hi Timmycutts, thanks for apologizing. As I wrote before, I admit, that my choice may have been overhasty, when I moved the comment to our only forum page relating to the unknown dragon rider, without seeing the discrepancy in the topics. I have to rethink the idea of creating a central forum page for discussions about the unknown rider. Feel free to create a new forum page and choose a more appropriate title. I don't like at all where this discussion was leading, especially when I read diff=prev&oldid=61206}} this answer on Fallen62's talk page. Working on this wiki should be fun, right? A fresh start is ok for me, I don't bear a grudge. --Weas-El (talk) 13:21, September 19, 2010 (UTC)